group discussion
topic:
Writing: Skills and trade secrets
I thought it might be interesting to open a forum where authors, publishers and interested parties can give small writing lessons online. We all can use tips on how to be better writers. Beginning writers need lots of help, but I've found that many experience writers also make common mistakes, or benefit from ideas about the craft.
My thought was to start posts with an idea about what level the topic addresses, and then just give up some good info. The info can be about the field, approaches to writing, big issues such as plot or theme, basic grammar, or hints related to style and tightening.
To give an example:
I'd put the following lesson at anything from a one to four on a five scale.
I find it helpful to do a that edit on my word processor. In a 120,000 word novel, THAT might take a day to go through, but it's worth it. I've found THAT about 10% of all thats (in my writing and in many novels I read) can just be omitted, while another 5% can be omitted with an added comma.
I've found THAT the results yield a tighter piece of work. Oops! I've found, the results yield a tighter piece of work.
Hope to inspire something good here and see if I’ve peaked any interest.
Gary Wedlund
My thought was to start posts with an idea about what level the topic addresses, and then just give up some good info. The info can be about the field, approaches to writing, big issues such as plot or theme, basic grammar, or hints related to style and tightening.
To give an example:
I'd put the following lesson at anything from a one to four on a five scale.
I find it helpful to do a that edit on my word processor. In a 120,000 word novel, THAT might take a day to go through, but it's worth it. I've found THAT about 10% of all thats (in my writing and in many novels I read) can just be omitted, while another 5% can be omitted with an added comma.
I've found THAT the results yield a tighter piece of work. Oops! I've found, the results yield a tighter piece of work.
Hope to inspire something good here and see if I’ve peaked any interest.
Gary Wedlund
That's a great idea. I do that myself and find a lot of extra "that's" hanging around. When I write in first person I do an "I" search as well. And sometimes I check for "Was," which I seem to like to use a lot.
I recently read a very good blog post on this topic, by Rachael King, who is, like myself, a New Zealand author who's on Goodreads. It deals with broad questions of story, and it's very thought-provoking, whether or not you feel all the points made apply to your own work.
See http://soundofbutterflies.blogspot.com/2...
Thank you for the blog...I loved Rachael's thing about Melodrama...I always bog that up. Thank you for the help...
If I may ask a question, how do you slow the pace of a novel? Mine always seem to move too quickly. Anyone have any ideas?
Kristen, too fast a pace isn't considered a problem very often in today's market. Things are very fast paced. But maybe I'm not understanding you well.
Well, it just seems that it goes too fast, when you read through it. I want it to sound like (I know this sounds really...too ambitious...) a classic. They move so gently, without interruption...maybe the right word really, is choppy. It's too choopy? I don't know...
I have the same problem - well, I'd like to think I "had" the same problem, but I'm not sure I'm over it yet. My suggestion would be to look at whether a reader will form the impression that your story moves at the pace your characters dictate, or whether they'll get the sense that the author is rushing through parts of the story to set up other parts. If you don't already do it, reading your work aloud may help with that.
There are a lot of ways a person can define a pace that is too fast, and just as many ways to change it. I think the specifics might help one know what to do about it. Just judging from young authors, I think it often (and probably not in your case) relates to writing from plot and not from character. That's why I hate outlines. I like to set a general idea for an end point in my head, ane just let the characters take over when I get a good feel for how to develop the next chapter or so. With a focus on characters, theme and maybe a good sub-plot, the pace tends to slow, and for all the right reasons.
Gary Wedlund
Gary Wedlund
Thanks, Tim and Gary. It's probably true, right now. I'm writing this scene about the caravan and all the details that go along with that. I just want to get through it, but it's not a scene I can just rush through, so I'm struggling. Thank you for all of your suggestions. The first chapter of my current novel is on Goodreads. If it all right, here's the link.
http://www.goodreads.com/story/show/2008...
Tell me what you think, if you would, and give suggestions. Eh?
First let me say that I enjoyed your writing and it left me wanting more. I understand your worry about pace. I noticed that the first few paragraphs raced while the later paragraphs were more sedate. The differences in the paragraphs seemed to be descriptions. You described more in your later paragraphs while the first paragraphs were skimpy on descriptions.
I have noticed for myself that the books I enjoy reading take me into "other worlds" by in-depth description of the worlds for me, including characters. For me the master storytellers are those who create another world and take the readers into that world. Have you had the experience of confusion when you finish reading a book when you look at your surroundings and slowly realize that you are not in that other world?! David Eddings is masterful as is J.R.R Tolkien and I am sure we can all add authors to the list of master storyteller - but there are relatively few compared to the abundance of authors.
I thought I might be helpful and comment on your opening, hoping to get at the pacing problem you mentioned.
To start with, it's usually best to start out a novel with something that impacts right out of the box. The rule of thumb is to tell us who the character is (the essence) and give some sense of problem, but that can vary. Do this through action and dialogue, if possible. Instead of a dump of information, yield it grudgingly. What do we really need to know about these characters, just to get to the next portion of the road? Don't TELL us anything else.
I'd look to the interchange between your two characters or a situation in the opening line that gets us involved immediately (within the first one or two sentences) and avoids telling us much of anything about Tigers, relationships (always best when shown) and the magic in her world. If you had some kind of playful exchange, you can communicate much of the TELL and wallow in the characters while doing it, letting your creatures show us who they are. This approach also keeps the pace smooth because you have to take some time to flesh out anybody.
The tendency is to tell us backstory, like this item, this item, this item, and then when the story actually starts, this happens, this happens, this happens. Characters, however, interact randomly. They smell things. They have indigestion. They step on each other's feet. The Tiger accidentally scratches her arm when she hands him something. They get curious. They are surprised in visible ways. They stumble and fall, avoiding the arrow, and then pull a whole quiver of arrows out, just getting to one. That's what I mean by character outward. The action slows accordingly and feels lived in because you continually ask, what do they do next and what if the horse is in the way of a reaction?
A writer needs to do that right out of the box, and stick with it. When you do, your pacing issue will resolve itself.
As it stands, after reading the first few paragraphs, I know lots about the characters, but the story is just sitting there. In fact, some of the slow story up front is repeated. Consider the opening two sentences, both of which show action, but nothing likely to catch an editor’s eye:
--I walked silently along the ground, toward home. Lawler prowled along softly behind me, currently in tiger form.--
This falls under the category of telling the same thing twice. The first tell is weak. The second is stronger. --Lawler prowled along softly behind me, currently in tiger form.-- The second tells us everything the first sentence did. Go through your work and condense. I think you can cut about four of the sentences in the first quarter page. (This seems like it will only quicken the pace, but that's an illusion because the issue with pace is characterization). Once you've done that, ask the next question: What of this can be shown later, hopefully through action or dialogue, which will slow the pace. What can be shown much later, or not at all? What has to be said NOW? Can I say it or show it instead of tell it.
Once done doing that, you might only have a half sentence that you can stuff into a thought as you are engaged in opening action. Maybe it's just: Lawler prowled along on padded feet behind me, quiet in tiger form.
I really do not want to know all about every character’s powers, interests, skills, and etc, two minutes into a story. I want to know what’s up, and why I care about them at all as ‘what’s up,’ threatens them. An editor also wants something that fits the rule about writing that says, the first sentence should be the best sentence, the first paragraph the best paragraph, the first page the best page, the first chapter the best chapter, and everything else should measure up. That’s kind of a tall order, I know.
Consider the first sentence is Jo Walton’s book, King’s Name: --The first I knew about the civil war was when my sister Aurien poisoned me.-- It’s almost impossible to not read the next sentence after a line like that.
Gary Wedlund
To start with, it's usually best to start out a novel with something that impacts right out of the box. The rule of thumb is to tell us who the character is (the essence) and give some sense of problem, but that can vary. Do this through action and dialogue, if possible. Instead of a dump of information, yield it grudgingly. What do we really need to know about these characters, just to get to the next portion of the road? Don't TELL us anything else.
I'd look to the interchange between your two characters or a situation in the opening line that gets us involved immediately (within the first one or two sentences) and avoids telling us much of anything about Tigers, relationships (always best when shown) and the magic in her world. If you had some kind of playful exchange, you can communicate much of the TELL and wallow in the characters while doing it, letting your creatures show us who they are. This approach also keeps the pace smooth because you have to take some time to flesh out anybody.
The tendency is to tell us backstory, like this item, this item, this item, and then when the story actually starts, this happens, this happens, this happens. Characters, however, interact randomly. They smell things. They have indigestion. They step on each other's feet. The Tiger accidentally scratches her arm when she hands him something. They get curious. They are surprised in visible ways. They stumble and fall, avoiding the arrow, and then pull a whole quiver of arrows out, just getting to one. That's what I mean by character outward. The action slows accordingly and feels lived in because you continually ask, what do they do next and what if the horse is in the way of a reaction?
A writer needs to do that right out of the box, and stick with it. When you do, your pacing issue will resolve itself.
As it stands, after reading the first few paragraphs, I know lots about the characters, but the story is just sitting there. In fact, some of the slow story up front is repeated. Consider the opening two sentences, both of which show action, but nothing likely to catch an editor’s eye:
--I walked silently along the ground, toward home. Lawler prowled along softly behind me, currently in tiger form.--
This falls under the category of telling the same thing twice. The first tell is weak. The second is stronger. --Lawler prowled along softly behind me, currently in tiger form.-- The second tells us everything the first sentence did. Go through your work and condense. I think you can cut about four of the sentences in the first quarter page. (This seems like it will only quicken the pace, but that's an illusion because the issue with pace is characterization). Once you've done that, ask the next question: What of this can be shown later, hopefully through action or dialogue, which will slow the pace. What can be shown much later, or not at all? What has to be said NOW? Can I say it or show it instead of tell it.
Once done doing that, you might only have a half sentence that you can stuff into a thought as you are engaged in opening action. Maybe it's just: Lawler prowled along on padded feet behind me, quiet in tiger form.
I really do not want to know all about every character’s powers, interests, skills, and etc, two minutes into a story. I want to know what’s up, and why I care about them at all as ‘what’s up,’ threatens them. An editor also wants something that fits the rule about writing that says, the first sentence should be the best sentence, the first paragraph the best paragraph, the first page the best page, the first chapter the best chapter, and everything else should measure up. That’s kind of a tall order, I know.
Consider the first sentence is Jo Walton’s book, King’s Name: --The first I knew about the civil war was when my sister Aurien poisoned me.-- It’s almost impossible to not read the next sentence after a line like that.
Gary Wedlund
Gary, Teatime, I'd just like to thank you. You're suggestions were VERY helpful. And Gary, thank you especially. I was looking for a group that would read my writing, and instead of just "It's good, keep going," I wanted someone who would actually help me and encourage. Thank you SO much. I'll post the revized version later this afternoon. You can read it, and see what you think. You're all amazing. Again, a million thanks.
Kristen
Okay, so it didn't get posted in the afternoon. It got posted six days later. But here it is. It's still very rough, I know that, but I hope I've made some good improvements. Tell me what you think!
http://www.goodreads.com/story/show/2008...
That version is about 100% better. It tends towards focusing on the problem of confronting the mother, which is good enough of a problem to keep the reader active. If this is what troubles the 1st person narrator, then this should reflect a lot, the mood, the dialogue, the pace of the trip, etc.. I'd go at that very directly. For example, where the dialogue pokes in is your better novel opening:
"Can’t we spend one more night out here?”
“Your mother is expecting you. And you know she has a room prepared.”
I groaned, and turned back to the trail. My feet were killing me, but I had no desire to hurry.
That approach of going right to the issue currently at hand reminds me of my opening in a book I wrote last year: I started like this:
“I scared.”
“Shush, Sarah, she’ll hear.”
Thankfully, my godmother didn’t glance in our direction as she rode toward Norfaton Castle. There was nothing much different with that; it felt as if the only thing she feared on earth was dwelling on the sight of me overly long.
Note that in my example, I’m trying to say something about the main character, and by using a halting sentence structure for the sidekick, we know a little about that character. Finally, we know something about the godmother and the relationship between her and the godchild. There is a hint of some conflict, namely, hiding and being shunned. There may be better examples than this, but I hope it shows that the opening is designed to do things for you, right out of the box.
Gets us directly into the conflict and begins to tell us a good deal about the characters. And, remember, most of the really good characterization is internal.
The morphing seems a little much, given there is little urgency to it and it isn't directly related to any significant need to do the morphing. I'd hold back on that, or at least stick to one example, such as the bird act because they need to see something distant. Best always to use these info-dumps in context with meaningful action.
Finally, the prose point to four lessons that benefit lots of writers: These are, the overuse of was, had, seemed and 2nd person.
Consider the passages (omitting some text in between):
He was silent because I had asked him to be, and respectful as always, he obeyed me.
...
Even Lawler seemed uneasy, the fur on his neck ruffled, and ears perked up for sounds I couldn’t perceive.
...
It was always eerie watching a morph. It made you feel as if you could, at any moment, suddenly writhe into a perfectly disgusting worm.
In the first example, I'm putting was and had on the hit list. That's not to say the sentence is wrong, but that it has the potential to be better. I'd rewrite: He prowled silently because I asked him to. Respectful as always, he obeyed me.
Substituting prowled for was, gives us an active verb. Had is redundant because it is followed by a past tense verb. That's like saying, "I'm past tense, and not only that, I'm past tense." Every time I see had or was, I go hunting for something better or an omission. Plenty of times I stick with the had or was, but often enough, I cancel them.
You wrote: Even Lawler seemed uneasy, the fur on his neck ruffled, and ears perked up for sounds I couldn’t perceive. That's not bad, but seemed sends up a flag anyway. Maybe it's what you want. Maybe was is better, because it's less vague. Seemed implied you are unsure though. Maybe he's uneasy, maybe it's only my imagination; we are told to think. The better image to a reader is something more direct and assured. So, what is Lawler doing that gives you the impression that he is uneasy. I'd say that instead. Maybe his tail jerks side to side, showing his uneasiness? It's physical, and thus better.
The third lesson regards slipping to 2nd person. You wrote: It was always eerie watching a morph. It made you feel as if you could, at any moment, suddenly writhe into a perfectly disgusting worm.
I suggest saying: It makes me feel eerie watching a morph. Or: It makes most people eerie watching a morph. Given that the phrase, writhe into a perfectly disgusting worm, goes into detail, the personal version, me, is better. If it isn't how the narrator feels then we wonder next, "How does she know morphing makes a person writhe like a worm?"
Hope some of that helps.
Gary Wedlund
"Can’t we spend one more night out here?”
“Your mother is expecting you. And you know she has a room prepared.”
I groaned, and turned back to the trail. My feet were killing me, but I had no desire to hurry.
That approach of going right to the issue currently at hand reminds me of my opening in a book I wrote last year: I started like this:
“I scared.”
“Shush, Sarah, she’ll hear.”
Thankfully, my godmother didn’t glance in our direction as she rode toward Norfaton Castle. There was nothing much different with that; it felt as if the only thing she feared on earth was dwelling on the sight of me overly long.
Note that in my example, I’m trying to say something about the main character, and by using a halting sentence structure for the sidekick, we know a little about that character. Finally, we know something about the godmother and the relationship between her and the godchild. There is a hint of some conflict, namely, hiding and being shunned. There may be better examples than this, but I hope it shows that the opening is designed to do things for you, right out of the box.
Gets us directly into the conflict and begins to tell us a good deal about the characters. And, remember, most of the really good characterization is internal.
The morphing seems a little much, given there is little urgency to it and it isn't directly related to any significant need to do the morphing. I'd hold back on that, or at least stick to one example, such as the bird act because they need to see something distant. Best always to use these info-dumps in context with meaningful action.
Finally, the prose point to four lessons that benefit lots of writers: These are, the overuse of was, had, seemed and 2nd person.
Consider the passages (omitting some text in between):
He was silent because I had asked him to be, and respectful as always, he obeyed me.
...
Even Lawler seemed uneasy, the fur on his neck ruffled, and ears perked up for sounds I couldn’t perceive.
...
It was always eerie watching a morph. It made you feel as if you could, at any moment, suddenly writhe into a perfectly disgusting worm.
In the first example, I'm putting was and had on the hit list. That's not to say the sentence is wrong, but that it has the potential to be better. I'd rewrite: He prowled silently because I asked him to. Respectful as always, he obeyed me.
Substituting prowled for was, gives us an active verb. Had is redundant because it is followed by a past tense verb. That's like saying, "I'm past tense, and not only that, I'm past tense." Every time I see had or was, I go hunting for something better or an omission. Plenty of times I stick with the had or was, but often enough, I cancel them.
You wrote: Even Lawler seemed uneasy, the fur on his neck ruffled, and ears perked up for sounds I couldn’t perceive. That's not bad, but seemed sends up a flag anyway. Maybe it's what you want. Maybe was is better, because it's less vague. Seemed implied you are unsure though. Maybe he's uneasy, maybe it's only my imagination; we are told to think. The better image to a reader is something more direct and assured. So, what is Lawler doing that gives you the impression that he is uneasy. I'd say that instead. Maybe his tail jerks side to side, showing his uneasiness? It's physical, and thus better.
The third lesson regards slipping to 2nd person. You wrote: It was always eerie watching a morph. It made you feel as if you could, at any moment, suddenly writhe into a perfectly disgusting worm.
I suggest saying: It makes me feel eerie watching a morph. Or: It makes most people eerie watching a morph. Given that the phrase, writhe into a perfectly disgusting worm, goes into detail, the personal version, me, is better. If it isn't how the narrator feels then we wonder next, "How does she know morphing makes a person writhe like a worm?"
Hope some of that helps.
Gary Wedlund
Well I have some writing that I would like someone to critique. Here it is, and please tell me what you think. The title isn't what it will be. It's just something for now.
http://www.goodreads.com/story/show/1669...
I might be able to add a little bit more later, but for now I can give a hint regarding one issue of POV that will definitely help you go to a new level.
Writers are often aware (or quickly made aware) of the fact that whenever you have a different character speak, you put it into a new paragraphy. For example:
Joe said, "Oh my, there's a tiger on my foot."
"You'd better run then," advised Mary.
"Good idea," agreed Joe as he limbered up, doing stretch exercises and preparing to go. "Just as soon as I warm up some."
Mary gave an exasperated face. "Forget it. He's already eaten your legs."
So, you see how that goes. Most everybody knows this rule of writing.
What many don't know, however, is it also relates to ANY change in point of view (POV). Sometimes writers get into their heads that just because they are 3rd person, they can forget that a POV has shifted and not go to the trouble of making a new paragraph. Once in a while that's OK, but 99% of the time it isn't. Treat any POV shift just like you do dialogue.
So, what is a POV shift, you might ask? The best way to think of it in 3rd person is to think of a cameraman as the 3rd person author. At one moment the camera might be God, way up in the sky, seeing the battlefield. The next minute, you're riding on the shoulder of the knight. The next you are in his head. Then you move to between two characters as they fight. Finally, you feel the enemy warrior's pain as he falls.
You've been all over the place. Think of it like this: You've shifted to 1st person 4 differnt places. Now, the first thing I'm asking is why? Why not stick with a POV for a while so we can all buy in? Usually that's a really good idea. Don't wander all over the battlefield like that without a good reason. Stick with someone and let's take a ride with him for a while. But, if you have to go with 4 different cameramen, at least make 4 different paragraphs.
Hope that gives you something to work on.
Gary Wedlund
Writers are often aware (or quickly made aware) of the fact that whenever you have a different character speak, you put it into a new paragraphy. For example:
Joe said, "Oh my, there's a tiger on my foot."
"You'd better run then," advised Mary.
"Good idea," agreed Joe as he limbered up, doing stretch exercises and preparing to go. "Just as soon as I warm up some."
Mary gave an exasperated face. "Forget it. He's already eaten your legs."
So, you see how that goes. Most everybody knows this rule of writing.
What many don't know, however, is it also relates to ANY change in point of view (POV). Sometimes writers get into their heads that just because they are 3rd person, they can forget that a POV has shifted and not go to the trouble of making a new paragraph. Once in a while that's OK, but 99% of the time it isn't. Treat any POV shift just like you do dialogue.
So, what is a POV shift, you might ask? The best way to think of it in 3rd person is to think of a cameraman as the 3rd person author. At one moment the camera might be God, way up in the sky, seeing the battlefield. The next minute, you're riding on the shoulder of the knight. The next you are in his head. Then you move to between two characters as they fight. Finally, you feel the enemy warrior's pain as he falls.
You've been all over the place. Think of it like this: You've shifted to 1st person 4 differnt places. Now, the first thing I'm asking is why? Why not stick with a POV for a while so we can all buy in? Usually that's a really good idea. Don't wander all over the battlefield like that without a good reason. Stick with someone and let's take a ride with him for a while. But, if you have to go with 4 different cameramen, at least make 4 different paragraphs.
Hope that gives you something to work on.
Gary Wedlund
As for the pace of the story I usually write the story, at least half the chapter, or until I get to a good stopping point. then I go back and EDIT for things like pace and other quick fix problems. I agree with Gary that the first sentence/paragraph/page is the most important part of the book. It sets the pace, tone of the book, and most important it must grab the attention of the reader and make them want to read more, or better yet buy our book. One of the first things I was taught is always start in the middle of something. (this example is from my first book)
"I sit without talking. Her image waits for me to speak. Tears burn my eyes as they mist over. I wipe them away with my uniform sleeve. My throat constricts, forming a lump that makes speech impossible. I stare at what she once was, young and beautiful, remembering how she died, how much I loved Emma, and how I killed her. My heart aches, wishing she was more than a holographic image. I feel a dull, empty pain begin to gnaw at my soul. Slowly reaching out with a trembling hand, I hit the end button. The receptionist’s image instantly replaces Emma’s. She informs me that the director wishes to speak with me. Standing to leave, I tell the receptionist, “Maybe next time. I’m running late.” This is just what I don’t need. Some shrink wasting my time with a bunch of hogwash about repressed feelings and other garbage."
It took me 4 rewrites to get to this point. Also in the first chapter we learn a lot of things about our hero, what he does, and about his past.
Another rule I learned early on was to never bore the reader. If you make it interesting you don't have to worry tomuch about pace.
I hope this helps
G W Pickle
I do not believe a simple new paragraph is a strong enough signal to prepare the reader for a POV shift. I suggest a double space or some form of divider. The simplest method is to assign a POV character at the start of a chapter and stick to it until the next chapter. In other words, have one camera for the scene and attach it to the POV character's shoulder.
I know what you're saying there, David. I just finished a book that did exactly that. It is a technique to stick exclusively with a single POV character in 3rd person and hold to it as if your life depended upon it. My approach was the same; try to keep the same POV character through the chapter, but where it breaks down, at least give a line break.
That, of course, isn't the only way to deal with it. I've read lots of good things that had shifts in POV through a chapter, but the risk of losing the reader in the MTV word of shifting views is great.
Suffice to say, the illusion that 3rd person frees a writer to do whatever pleases them regarding POV, willy nilly, is just that, illusion. And, just to complicate, even the POV character has POV shifts within as the camera goes from seeing their world, to seeing into their head, to feeling their pain, etc.. Considering, even 1st person has plenty of POV shifting to keep a handle on.
I hope the young writers are reading in on these comments by GW and David, because this is the sort of thing you just don't get in the usual high school or college writing class.
Gary Wedlund
That, of course, isn't the only way to deal with it. I've read lots of good things that had shifts in POV through a chapter, but the risk of losing the reader in the MTV word of shifting views is great.
Suffice to say, the illusion that 3rd person frees a writer to do whatever pleases them regarding POV, willy nilly, is just that, illusion. And, just to complicate, even the POV character has POV shifts within as the camera goes from seeing their world, to seeing into their head, to feeling their pain, etc.. Considering, even 1st person has plenty of POV shifting to keep a handle on.
I hope the young writers are reading in on these comments by GW and David, because this is the sort of thing you just don't get in the usual high school or college writing class.
Gary Wedlund
I wrote a book that has a lot of POV shift in it - yeah, I'm a new writer, and shame on me... :) I knew about the dangers of POV shift, but part of the concept of my book is that there are sixteen different personalities in it, and each POV is important in examining the way the culture they are in is changing... That is the concept. anyway...
I think I did an okay job with the POV shifting; however, I know I have room for improvement. When I did the first write, I simply changed view whenever it seemed like a good opportunity, but now I want to create smoother, and more interesting POV switches...
Sinse I have a lot of switches, does anyone have advice on multiple ways to convieniently switch POV? eg. One character makes eye contact with the next - then extra space with asterisk to divide, and set up the new POV in the next paragraph...
And yes, I am planning the sequal to the first book with clean POV shift in mind, and much less of it!
I personally think it's really important to make it clear when you have a POV shift. Either starting a new chapter, or new sub section of a chapter really helps. In "Cold in the Light," I switched sometimes within chapters, but only at numbered sub-sections.
Sudden POV shifts without warning throw me completely out of a story. That's when I become very clear that I'm "reading" something rather than "experiencing" it.
I can recall one instance where shifting POVs seriously impressed me. I believe it was in a Gregory Maguire book. Few writers are better at prose and clarity than Gregory.
What he did was move from a main character entering a ballroom, to someone who saw her. That girl was, in turn, seen by a third person who nudged a prince. The prince saw the second girl and fell under her enchantment. I thought, damn, Gregory just pulled me across the room using pure POV and nothing else.
But of course, like Chad, David and Charles are saying, you have to know what you're doing and make it very clear. An author has to do things on purpose and with the skill set to know they are breaking a general rule for a greater purpose. If the author isn't even aware of the pain writers go through to keep POV straight, the work is apt to fatally suffer until it's figured out.
Gary Wedlund
What he did was move from a main character entering a ballroom, to someone who saw her. That girl was, in turn, seen by a third person who nudged a prince. The prince saw the second girl and fell under her enchantment. I thought, damn, Gregory just pulled me across the room using pure POV and nothing else.
But of course, like Chad, David and Charles are saying, you have to know what you're doing and make it very clear. An author has to do things on purpose and with the skill set to know they are breaking a general rule for a greater purpose. If the author isn't even aware of the pain writers go through to keep POV straight, the work is apt to fatally suffer until it's figured out.
Gary Wedlund
In answer to Chad's question about multiple POVs within a section, I can only say that it depends. The two things that would govern me are:
1) Clarity. The purpose of line breaks is clarity, not convention. So, if you choose to move from one POV to another more smoothly, just make sure the readers ride over to the next POV with you and land where you want them.
2) Necessity. I know one writer who takes the approach of several POV shifts, often within a chapter, while each chapter focuses on one character predominantly. The chapters are about a page long. Just when I get into a tiny bit of that character, he shifts to the next. To me, it was very frustrating because I never got into any of the characters (or any of the plot) to the extent that I cared one bit about them. Not only was the approach unnecessary, but it proved counterproductive.
I do, however, have a suggested form that might work for you (depending entirely upon what you're doing). In one of my chapters of a recent book, I had the queen be the focus of a room of characters. The POV actually was the mysterious cameraman standing between them all. The thing to keep in mind is to stay out of anybody's head and remain omniscient.
This worked pretty well for me in that chapter because it was full of dialogue. I didn't have to visit anybody. They said what they thought, sometimes after prodding by the Queen. Still, I worried about the lack of anchor endemic to pure omniscience. Regarding that, I made the Queen the focus of the room. Conversation and action wandered, but it always came back to the Queen. She served POV kind of like a mirror reflects a person. So, my advice is that you can play god with a camera if you like, but be cautious to find a focal point and give some time to that focal point before moving on.
Gary Wedlund
1) Clarity. The purpose of line breaks is clarity, not convention. So, if you choose to move from one POV to another more smoothly, just make sure the readers ride over to the next POV with you and land where you want them.
2) Necessity. I know one writer who takes the approach of several POV shifts, often within a chapter, while each chapter focuses on one character predominantly. The chapters are about a page long. Just when I get into a tiny bit of that character, he shifts to the next. To me, it was very frustrating because I never got into any of the characters (or any of the plot) to the extent that I cared one bit about them. Not only was the approach unnecessary, but it proved counterproductive.
I do, however, have a suggested form that might work for you (depending entirely upon what you're doing). In one of my chapters of a recent book, I had the queen be the focus of a room of characters. The POV actually was the mysterious cameraman standing between them all. The thing to keep in mind is to stay out of anybody's head and remain omniscient.
This worked pretty well for me in that chapter because it was full of dialogue. I didn't have to visit anybody. They said what they thought, sometimes after prodding by the Queen. Still, I worried about the lack of anchor endemic to pure omniscience. Regarding that, I made the Queen the focus of the room. Conversation and action wandered, but it always came back to the Queen. She served POV kind of like a mirror reflects a person. So, my advice is that you can play god with a camera if you like, but be cautious to find a focal point and give some time to that focal point before moving on.
Gary Wedlund
Peter Beagle's "The Innkeeper's Song" juggles multiple points of view. Maybe even juggles and somersaults while dancing on the tightrope.Which is what you can do when you are a true master of the art.
Also. for Beagle's novel, having those multiple POVs served a purpose in advancing the plot. I'm not sure that he could have told that particular story any other way -- which is the major reason for having multiple POVs.
I prefer to keep the POV simple. It makes the whole writing process easier for me. It can even make for greater tension. After all, my characters, especially my main POV character, can be hoodwinked, tricked, manipulated, and led down the garden path. And, if the reader is only seeing the world through my POV character's eyes, then the reader can also be led down that some garden path to the dragon lurking behind the bush.
Thanks all, some great comments... I will particularily pay attention to the following:
-PoV reasoning - why am I shifting - don't shift unless it forwards the plot,
-new PoV focus - link the two PoV's with the same focus to smooth transition,
-use the space/asterist breaks to create good separation for the reader - iow, switch only at chapter or subchapter breaks,
-use PoV to explore a scene and the dynamic of the scene...
I will try to adapt a few scenes, and see how it reads - maybe I'll post the before and afters, if anyone is interested that is - lol...
One solution to excessive POV shifts is to show what a character is thinking and feeling through action and dialogue. For example:
Jane's glowing smile had faded completely by the time John had finished talking. He could understand her disappointment, but his mind was made up.
"You bastard," she hissed as she turned and marched out of the room.
In this short example we know Jane went from happy to angry with John without being inside her head.
If you really want to show something from two points of view, you can even retell the same event from someone else's eyes in the next chapter.
Some good comments on POV from the group here. A couple of important things to note, though:1) A master of a craft can break the rules when s/he wants, but you have to learn the rules before you can break them. Starting authors should stick to learning the rules and abiding by them. Doing so will make their writing better -- and help them make sales as well.
2) Switching POV used to be the norm in the days of Edgar Rice Burroughs and many other classic authors. Today, though, that style is seen as old-fashioned and even naive. Today's editors want and expect stories to be told with a "strong" and "consistent" POV.
That means sticking with _one_ POV per chapter/section. If you have to break from that POV, you should use an obvious device (usually 1-3 asterisks) to set off the change in POV. (Often, those asterisks are changed to line breaks in a printed book.)
If you're writing a chapter or a short story and you see lots of asterisks on your page, chances are you're using too many POV shifts. At that point, you need to ask yourself which of those shifts -- if any -- you actually need. Then go back and rewrite to eliminate the unnecessary ones.
Most modern editors _hate_ unnecessary POV shifts. They will spot the only place you've (accidentally) done it in an entire story and unfailingly flag that paragraph for revision.
And rightly so.
Strong and consistent POV helps your readers to buy into your world and characters.
One of the best examples of this in today's market is the Harry Potter series. The books are told entirely from Harry's POV, with very few exceptions (the "villain chapters" that appeared, usually as prologue, in the later books).
In HP, everything we see, hear, and feel is filtered through Harry. When Ron and Hermione have a fight, we _don't_ know what they're thinking (unless they tell Harry), but we know what _Harry_ thinks they're thinking. That's one reason we buy into the boy wizard and his problems. (Excellent plotting is another.)
So, to sum, up...
Beginning authors should learn to write from a single POV in their work, and also learn how to indicate to their readers when they're switching POV. Doing so will avoid confusing readers.
And, as we all know, a confused reader is much more likely to stop reading your work.
We don't want that!
Good luck!
-- Steve Sullivan
www.stephendsullivan.com
Tension, and other golden parachutes
Last week I watched the movie, The Strangers. In case you missed it, it features Liv Tyler, who is terrorized in a remotely located house by two teenaged girls and a man. She has a boyfriend who is as inept at defending himself as she is.
My comment to my wife upon leaving the theater was that every time they should have gone left, they went right. Every time they stood up they should have crawled. Seemingly, they were unable to employ basic reasoning to their situation (unfailingly). I’m going to save you from watching this claptrap and tell you that in the end they are both murdered by the knife Liv left sitting on the kitchen counter, in spite of the fact that she put it there and ran by it three times while trying to hide in the pantry. There was no plot twist at all. Let me give a list to show their ineptness.
1) She falls into a ditch, and though the ditch is in shadows and nobody’s seen her yet, crawls out stumbling with the ever-predictable sprained ankle.
2) Going into the tool shed, she sees that the axe is missing. It never occurs to her to pick up a pipe or a shovel.
3) At one point they get their hands on a shotgun, then find a way to lose it. This, of course, happens while the other people aren’t even armed.
4) Instead of leaving together, they split up. And, in fact, they never consider leaving at all, going into the dark woods, and making themselves impossible to track.
5) In spite of the fact that evidence shows the bad guys are in the house, they lock the door and tell each other they only have to wait it out.
6) When a friend comes by, holding a cell phone, he sees the car is trashed, the windows and door axed, and blood all over the front room. He slowly goes down the hall, yelling their names. 9-1-1, what is that, three buttons?
I hope you get my drift, because that’s just the tip of it. So, in the midst of the conversation with my wife, my wife says that they had to do it that way in order to build the tension. Well, of course, she’s absolutely right. I had to agree. This leads to two questions:
1) Is tension that is artificially derived by virtue of a bad writer’s hand, worth anything in the grand scheme of things? I mean, I started cheering for the bad guys in the end.
2) Is it necessary that every book or movie have this ultimate, death defying item known as tension? I mean it in the sense that I hear bandied about so often; tension that has us on the edge of our seats every minute of the viewing or read.
I say not. I tend to like authors such as Modesitt, who let their main characters win. A lot. Sure, they get kicked to the ground every so often, and even get cornered a few times, but by virtue of their own ability and forethought, win the day. The grand tension advocates will tell me that I’m nuts. We need vulnerability right up to the last word. But I’m thinking, oh really? Ninety percent of the time when I read those really tense books where the heroine goes into the basement without a baseball bat (causing me to lose all respect for her intellect), she end up getting out because of a golden parachute. I mean to tell you, it’s epidemic to the point of being expected anymore And, these freaks actually have the gall to say they write better books, when in fact they are really telling me that they can’t be more inventive with their characters, can’t create creative plot points and can’t write characters we like without putting them into a pit without a ladder.
Just for reference, a golden parachute is defined as that point in any plot where the airplane is going to crash and all of a sudden, the main character reaches under the seat and discovers: “Oh my god, a parachute! I wonder how it got there?”
Duh! Some stupid author put it there, airhead!
Screw fake tension. Give me something real.
What do you think?
Gary Wedlund
Last week I watched the movie, The Strangers. In case you missed it, it features Liv Tyler, who is terrorized in a remotely located house by two teenaged girls and a man. She has a boyfriend who is as inept at defending himself as she is.
My comment to my wife upon leaving the theater was that every time they should have gone left, they went right. Every time they stood up they should have crawled. Seemingly, they were unable to employ basic reasoning to their situation (unfailingly). I’m going to save you from watching this claptrap and tell you that in the end they are both murdered by the knife Liv left sitting on the kitchen counter, in spite of the fact that she put it there and ran by it three times while trying to hide in the pantry. There was no plot twist at all. Let me give a list to show their ineptness.
1) She falls into a ditch, and though the ditch is in shadows and nobody’s seen her yet, crawls out stumbling with the ever-predictable sprained ankle.
2) Going into the tool shed, she sees that the axe is missing. It never occurs to her to pick up a pipe or a shovel.
3) At one point they get their hands on a shotgun, then find a way to lose it. This, of course, happens while the other people aren’t even armed.
4) Instead of leaving together, they split up. And, in fact, they never consider leaving at all, going into the dark woods, and making themselves impossible to track.
5) In spite of the fact that evidence shows the bad guys are in the house, they lock the door and tell each other they only have to wait it out.
6) When a friend comes by, holding a cell phone, he sees the car is trashed, the windows and door axed, and blood all over the front room. He slowly goes down the hall, yelling their names. 9-1-1, what is that, three buttons?
I hope you get my drift, because that’s just the tip of it. So, in the midst of the conversation with my wife, my wife says that they had to do it that way in order to build the tension. Well, of course, she’s absolutely right. I had to agree. This leads to two questions:
1) Is tension that is artificially derived by virtue of a bad writer’s hand, worth anything in the grand scheme of things? I mean, I started cheering for the bad guys in the end.
2) Is it necessary that every book or movie have this ultimate, death defying item known as tension? I mean it in the sense that I hear bandied about so often; tension that has us on the edge of our seats every minute of the viewing or read.
I say not. I tend to like authors such as Modesitt, who let their main characters win. A lot. Sure, they get kicked to the ground every so often, and even get cornered a few times, but by virtue of their own ability and forethought, win the day. The grand tension advocates will tell me that I’m nuts. We need vulnerability right up to the last word. But I’m thinking, oh really? Ninety percent of the time when I read those really tense books where the heroine goes into the basement without a baseball bat (causing me to lose all respect for her intellect), she end up getting out because of a golden parachute. I mean to tell you, it’s epidemic to the point of being expected anymore And, these freaks actually have the gall to say they write better books, when in fact they are really telling me that they can’t be more inventive with their characters, can’t create creative plot points and can’t write characters we like without putting them into a pit without a ladder.
Just for reference, a golden parachute is defined as that point in any plot where the airplane is going to crash and all of a sudden, the main character reaches under the seat and discovers: “Oh my god, a parachute! I wonder how it got there?”
Duh! Some stupid author put it there, airhead!
Screw fake tension. Give me something real.
What do you think?
Gary Wedlund
Re: Tension
I must agree with you about phony tension. Give readers and movie goers some credit. I personally want to see an intelligent person really figure her way out of a difficult situation, no cop outs. However, Steingard makes a sad, but true point. Unfortunately, stupidity is real and the masses flock to it because it's easy. I am trying not to clump all of humanity into a humongous mass, but many have become sedentary and lazy and expect a golden parachute. Think of all the fad diets and get rich quick schemes.
It comes back to the reasons we write. Do we write to make millions on predictable golden parachute stories with fake tension that give "The Masses" the easy happily ever after they can't get in their own lives? Do we write to fight these stereotypes? Do we write because we have stories in us that are driving us crazy, imerging in the middle of the night and caring nothing for the sleep and nurishment of the scribe? Do we write because we can not find the story we want to read in published literature?
And why do we read? Are the challenges in our lives so pressing that all we want is to read a story that comes out neat and tidy? Are we surrounded by duldrums, in need of some action, and therefore tension, desiring a story of suspense or even a character that we can feel superior to as we see they are too stupid to save themselves even with all the obvious parachutes aboard the nose-diving plane? I, myself, hate to feel superior to a main charachter. If I can figure out what's going on before he can, I am almost always disappointed in the book.
I really don't know the answer to any of those questions, but I think part of it is, that sometimes we need something in our lives. In times where we lead boring, predictable lives, we like to read something with adventure, and stress, and unhappiness. In times when we are constantly threatened by stress, and money issues, and other things, we like to read something that will tell us that everything will be okay. At least, that's part of it. Sometimes, it's opposite, that we read something that exactly what we're going through. Maybe we just need to sympathize with someone...I don't know...I just I shouldn't throw around ideas in a board, but I thought I'd take a shot.
One of my favorite movies is Tremors, one of the few Creature Features where the monsters are as smart as the people and the people are smart. None of the usual lame stupidity. They make the right decisions, and use their brains against an enemy that's using theirs. The problem with movies of this sort is that it requires writers with brains too.
Always throw out ideas. That's particularly the case when ideas relate to the reality of life. Your comment kind of contrasts against the student work I've read over my life. Often times the work relates to girlfriend/boyfriend, cars and how mommy doesn’t understand me. When I read it I get the feeling that there isn't anything being said other than meaningless plot and shallow feelings about leaving the nest.
My point is, earned pain and passion gives a person something to say. It makes the writing authentic. It almost always means the writer is a little older.
Consider how this might relate to a fantasy writing. How many fantasy novels are about strange characters Tolkening around the countryside? Now consider the books that seem to have something to say about the world we live in, but just happen to be entrapped within a fantasy setting. That’s what I mean by writing the story from the characters and defining the characters from the inside out.
Warprize, by Vaughan Elizabeth, is an example of a passion driven work that speaks to real sacrifice and duty. In that book a princess allows herself to be given as a slave prize in order to end a war. Another example is King's Peace by Jo Walton, where a woman serves her king in a noble cause, never finding love of her own. The heroine is raped, has the baby, gives it up, and untimately takes both the boy back and the rapist, leading to a very complex array of relationships.
A person has to feel some pain and feel their characters in order to be able to write full of intensity like Elizabeth and Jo do.
So yeah, write down how you feel and how that strikes up ideas, because in my opinion there isn't anything else worth writing about.
Gary Wedlund
My point is, earned pain and passion gives a person something to say. It makes the writing authentic. It almost always means the writer is a little older.
Consider how this might relate to a fantasy writing. How many fantasy novels are about strange characters Tolkening around the countryside? Now consider the books that seem to have something to say about the world we live in, but just happen to be entrapped within a fantasy setting. That’s what I mean by writing the story from the characters and defining the characters from the inside out.
Warprize, by Vaughan Elizabeth, is an example of a passion driven work that speaks to real sacrifice and duty. In that book a princess allows herself to be given as a slave prize in order to end a war. Another example is King's Peace by Jo Walton, where a woman serves her king in a noble cause, never finding love of her own. The heroine is raped, has the baby, gives it up, and untimately takes both the boy back and the rapist, leading to a very complex array of relationships.
A person has to feel some pain and feel their characters in order to be able to write full of intensity like Elizabeth and Jo do.
So yeah, write down how you feel and how that strikes up ideas, because in my opinion there isn't anything else worth writing about.
Gary Wedlund
"My point is, earned pain and passion gives a person something to say. It makes the writing authentic. It almost always means the writer is a little older."
This is exactly right. The strong point of Elizabeth Moon's writing is her experience, especially in the military. She still has characters traversing the countryside making stew, but in the military stuff she's first-rate. One of the things I love about fantasy is the way an author who pays actual attention to his life and uses that material in his writing can use it in ways never intended or even possible in the real world. Often what he has to say is about the meanings of things and events, and those meanings are much more readily expressed in a fantasy setting.
This is an excerpt from the Paul Park book, A Princess of Roumania:
Gulka was a thin, nervous man with a weak beard and a spot on his face. "When it is dark, we all move forward," Raevsky explained for the third time.
Let me start by saying that Paul Park's Tor novel has a great and inventive plot. I'm enjoying it and am halfway through. On the flip side, it suffers from a range of style issues, some of which I might get to in the future because addressing them might make us all better writers. I'd give Paul a 5 if he worked out these issues. I prefer using examples from books with merit, showing that we all have room for growth.
So, on to the lesson:
The sentence, Gulka was a thin, nervous man with a weak beard and a spot on his face, is nicely descriptive. Yet, I wonder why it falls in the midst of the action, saying so many superficial things about a side character? Then the second sentence hits, and we jump from an omniscient view of Gulka, into the mouth of Raevsky: "When it is dark, we all move forward," Raevsky explained for the third time.
The whole thing might be reworded like this:
Raevsky knelt close to Gulka, a thin, nervous man with a weak beard. When Gulka looked up, showing the harsh mole that defined his face, Raevsky said for the third time that evening, "When it is dark, we all move forward."
Now, why is this better? Or is it? I leave that up to discussion.
Gary Wedlund
Gulka was a thin, nervous man with a weak beard and a spot on his face. "When it is dark, we all move forward," Raevsky explained for the third time.
Let me start by saying that Paul Park's Tor novel has a great and inventive plot. I'm enjoying it and am halfway through. On the flip side, it suffers from a range of style issues, some of which I might get to in the future because addressing them might make us all better writers. I'd give Paul a 5 if he worked out these issues. I prefer using examples from books with merit, showing that we all have room for growth.
So, on to the lesson:
The sentence, Gulka was a thin, nervous man with a weak beard and a spot on his face, is nicely descriptive. Yet, I wonder why it falls in the midst of the action, saying so many superficial things about a side character? Then the second sentence hits, and we jump from an omniscient view of Gulka, into the mouth of Raevsky: "When it is dark, we all move forward," Raevsky explained for the third time.
The whole thing might be reworded like this:
Raevsky knelt close to Gulka, a thin, nervous man with a weak beard. When Gulka looked up, showing the harsh mole that defined his face, Raevsky said for the third time that evening, "When it is dark, we all move forward."
Now, why is this better? Or is it? I leave that up to discussion.
Gary Wedlund
I'm with you. The re-write is definately better, it just seems to flow. The first version is jerky; you assume that the character being described is the one that's speaking (as it's all in the same paragraph), but when you realize it's someone else you almost have to stop and do a quick double-take.
The second one is quick and clear about who's saying what, yet still describes the extra very well.
(Do you often do these quick re-writes in your head when reading Gary? I hope so, it's nice to know I'm not alone!)
A.L. Travis
I do exactly that, and sometimes it drives me absolutely nuts. The form that always gets me is the, was xxxing, which I automatically change to, xxxed, in my head. Some books, that's four times per paragraph. Obviously, a few cases are fine and maybe even good, but when it happens ten times a page I am a basket case by the end of it.
The other thing that drives me crazy is the pronoun after two or more characters. Usually this happens when an author has a billion characters, to be honest, amplifying the problem. Sometimes you go two pages before you get a clue to who the pronoun is about. There's nothing wrong with nouns, and if an author makes a mistake on the side of clarity, all is
forgiven.
Gary Wedlund
The other thing that drives me crazy is the pronoun after two or more characters. Usually this happens when an author has a billion characters, to be honest, amplifying the problem. Sometimes you go two pages before you get a clue to who the pronoun is about. There's nothing wrong with nouns, and if an author makes a mistake on the side of clarity, all is
forgiven.
Gary Wedlund
Even my editor missed those, when we were cleaning up my second novel, A Warrior Made . My publisher caught them and sent it back. She had a simple technique, in which she would change the background behind every 'was' and 'were' to some other color. Blindingly obvious, done like that.I also dislike the pronoun problem, but some authors solve it by constantly referring to the person or thing by name, which sounds equally unrealistic. It takes some creativity to get around that, and I've often had to rewrite whole sentences or paragraphs to set a scene up in such a way that the issue doesn't arise.
Ok, I just recently wrote a flash fiction story with unsual tense and sci-fi theme. How do I post it, without copyright infrindgement? I have nothing copywrited so I am not sure what to do about internet sharing. Please help because I'd love to share it for feedback! Thanks.
I'm currently editing my first book to get it ready for submittal. Good point about the THAT's. I found a lot that I just didn't need.
Hi, Anissa,I don't know what's on the wikipedia page, but anything you write is automatically copywritten. The only thing that could defeat you is if someone else wrote the same thing and can prove that they wrote it before you.
So if you post something on a public forum, the time and date is pretty much set. The US Copyright office is simply a vehicle for 'staking your claim' to a certain body of work.
Hope this helps.
Norm
Word of caution here: It is absolutely true that if you wrote it, you own it. There is no need to copyright anything, assuming you can prove you did something before someone else. That's why you just send your manuscripts out and once accepted, leave the copywriting thing to the publisher. Of course, you also have to deal with protecting yourself if the jackass shows up. He has no case, but who has the money to go to court, or to defend against a published piece of work that is 95% yours?
On another side, this notion of putting your work into the public forum is more of a threat to you. It is, in effect, published once you display it to the public. That means, to many publishers, that you are giving up second publishing rights instead of first publishing rights. Ouch!
You can avoid this a number of ways if you still want others to see it and give feedback:
1) Only post small portions of the work.
2) Only give the work up to a few individuals who you trust to give the feedback you need.
3) Join a write group, where sharing is part of the process and not in the general domain.
An aside regarding write groups: I could recommend a couple in the Columbus, Ohio area, but most of them are just about useless. Most of them have people bring in work and hand it out or read on the spot. Members tend to be all over the place in terms of skills and interests. Often you get really bad advice. I was in one where it was unanimous that the only way to write was present tense. About ten writers I’ve met in groups have said either that first person is bad form or third person is bad form. In certain cases, this might be true, but as a categorical, that’s just plan dumb. I regret that I actually spent several days trying to convert a past tense piece to present tense, just to please the idiots prior to me knowing better.
I've been lucky to find groups that are better than that, but at the very least, a group that passes the work out a week or two prior is better than a group that can't even get the main thing of allowing time for reviews prior to the meeting. If you ever get in a good write group, you will soon find it indispensable. At this point I'd contend that it's nearly impossible for me to write a good book without several ongoing reviews. Others catch things you don't. They catch things both on the micro and macro levels, and they do so in every chapter, regardless of how good you are at writing. I know, without a doubt, that I’d catch something worth rethinking out of every chapter submitted to me, regardless of the author or level of edit. That’s not to say I’m a better writer than anybody else, but it is to say I can make any writer better because I have different eyes.
Another option is to form your own write group. It takes little advertising (Craig’s list) and a reservation at the local library for space.
Gary Wedlund
On another side, this notion of putting your work into the public forum is more of a threat to you. It is, in effect, published once you display it to the public. That means, to many publishers, that you are giving up second publishing rights instead of first publishing rights. Ouch!
You can avoid this a number of ways if you still want others to see it and give feedback:
1) Only post small portions of the work.
2) Only give the work up to a few individuals who you trust to give the feedback you need.
3) Join a write group, where sharing is part of the process and not in the general domain.
An aside regarding write groups: I could recommend a couple in the Columbus, Ohio area, but most of them are just about useless. Most of them have people bring in work and hand it out or read on the spot. Members tend to be all over the place in terms of skills and interests. Often you get really bad advice. I was in one where it was unanimous that the only way to write was present tense. About ten writers I’ve met in groups have said either that first person is bad form or third person is bad form. In certain cases, this might be true, but as a categorical, that’s just plan dumb. I regret that I actually spent several days trying to convert a past tense piece to present tense, just to please the idiots prior to me knowing better.
I've been lucky to find groups that are better than that, but at the very least, a group that passes the work out a week or two prior is better than a group that can't even get the main thing of allowing time for reviews prior to the meeting. If you ever get in a good write group, you will soon find it indispensable. At this point I'd contend that it's nearly impossible for me to write a good book without several ongoing reviews. Others catch things you don't. They catch things both on the micro and macro levels, and they do so in every chapter, regardless of how good you are at writing. I know, without a doubt, that I’d catch something worth rethinking out of every chapter submitted to me, regardless of the author or level of edit. That’s not to say I’m a better writer than anybody else, but it is to say I can make any writer better because I have different eyes.
Another option is to form your own write group. It takes little advertising (Craig’s list) and a reservation at the local library for space.
Gary Wedlund
Perrin
Sounds like an interesting premise for a story and I hope you keep working on it. I'd probably suggest you work a little on the grammar and sentence structure. One trick that helps me out is to read it out loud to find out how well it flows. I would also suggest spelling the numbers out (i.e. one thousand vs. 1,000).
Hope that helps!
Rick
Gary,
Are you asking "Why should the reader finish the book you are writing?" If so, I personally hope to not only open up a new world for anyone picking up my book, but I also hope to make them examine their own life and realize a new truth about themselves.
I guess most any story is going to have a plot, but only a good story is going to have a point to the plot. In the case of the book that I'm working on I certainly have a plot, but the point of that plot is to make anyone who reads the story look deep down inside. Can the reader relate to the fears, prejudices, and weaknesses that permeate my characters. More importantly, will the reader learn a personal lesson when they see these characters either overcome or fall farther into darkenss and despair.
Rick wrote: Most any story is going to have a plot, but only a good story is going to have a point to the plot. The point of that plot is to make anyone who reads the story look deep down inside.
While this doesn’t directly address the concept of PLOT POINT, Rick has written about what I consider to be the largest missing element in most writing. A book is more than a plot. A book has to have something to say. In fact, some define a plot as the why of a story. Defined like that, it’s pretty hard to say you’ve even written a plot if the story ends up being nothing more than a sequence of events, hardships, peaks, valleys, travels, thoughts and dialogue. All of the mechanics might be there, but Frankenstein has no heart.
The question begs: “Why am I writing this?” If a writing doesn’t answer this for the author and reader, it’s wasting all of our time.
Gary Wedlund
While this doesn’t directly address the concept of PLOT POINT, Rick has written about what I consider to be the largest missing element in most writing. A book is more than a plot. A book has to have something to say. In fact, some define a plot as the why of a story. Defined like that, it’s pretty hard to say you’ve even written a plot if the story ends up being nothing more than a sequence of events, hardships, peaks, valleys, travels, thoughts and dialogue. All of the mechanics might be there, but Frankenstein has no heart.
The question begs: “Why am I writing this?” If a writing doesn’t answer this for the author and reader, it’s wasting all of our time.
Gary Wedlund
Defining plot point, and what it can do for you:
In my current novel I’m stuck at a place where my main character is involved in several investigations. The police are after her. The vampire slayers are after her. The main vampire is after her. She’s not a vampire. Clues to troubles exist at two gypsy homes, a Brotherhood office an accounting firm and who knows where else.
While this goes on, she is recently divorced. Her daughter is estranged. Her sister is a total mystery, and sis’s servant is a transitioning transsexual. She has a new boyfriend and a new job and in three days has lost 60 pounds, fifteen years of age and men are suddenly attracted to her like a magnet.
Ironically she has no car, few clothes and no steady place to live.
Even more ironically, the story isn’t a mystery novel.
So, you might ask, “What does that have to do with plot points?”
Well, in order to do all of this I have to move my characters from point A to point B. A LOT. I have to engage my character in a ton of conversations. I have to feed my character through a lot of settings and seemingly endless conflicts.
NONE OF THIS RELATES TO PLOT POINT. All of this is plot. That might not be all that good.
I once said that the hardest thing for me is moving a character from point A to B. It is a really hard thing to do without boring the writer. Writers engage in lots of characterization, descriptive landscape, wind, weather, where’s the sun, what time of year is it and reflections about bad relationships (hopefully not mommy and daddy), mud and clothing design.
Ideally, I want to get to the PLOT POINTS. I want those moments in the plot where things change. I can define the first portion of my current novel in plot points thus: Woman gets screwed in divorce. She realizes someone is following her. A gypsy curses her, but she blows it off. Her sister and her house are really, really, really strange, but hey, she's an addict, what did she expect?
Sometimes I read books where I wonder if there are any plot points. Everybody seems to just be on the road to getting somewhere, taking a billion pages doing it. I love Robert Jordan, but hey, I skim that crazy dead man. Once the characters arrive, a bad novelist does nothing but sit there and describe the different setting, going right back to day two on the road. (All of this road business being either metaphorical or literal, depending upon what you're doing).
So, my point is, a writer needs to make the getting there interesting, but also be aware of the concept of plot point so that it’s worth the travel. It is worth the time to start thinking in terms of PLOT POINTS.
Gary Wedlund
In my current novel I’m stuck at a place where my main character is involved in several investigations. The police are after her. The vampire slayers are after her. The main vampire is after her. She’s not a vampire. Clues to troubles exist at two gypsy homes, a Brotherhood office an accounting firm and who knows where else.
While this goes on, she is recently divorced. Her daughter is estranged. Her sister is a total mystery, and sis’s servant is a transitioning transsexual. She has a new boyfriend and a new job and in three days has lost 60 pounds, fifteen years of age and men are suddenly attracted to her like a magnet.
Ironically she has no car, few clothes and no steady place to live.
Even more ironically, the story isn’t a mystery novel.
So, you might ask, “What does that have to do with plot points?”
Well, in order to do all of this I have to move my characters from point A to point B. A LOT. I have to engage my character in a ton of conversations. I have to feed my character through a lot of settings and seemingly endless conflicts.
NONE OF THIS RELATES TO PLOT POINT. All of this is plot. That might not be all that good.
I once said that the hardest thing for me is moving a character from point A to B. It is a really hard thing to do without boring the writer. Writers engage in lots of characterization, descriptive landscape, wind, weather, where’s the sun, what time of year is it and reflections about bad relationships (hopefully not mommy and daddy), mud and clothing design.
Ideally, I want to get to the PLOT POINTS. I want those moments in the plot where things change. I can define the first portion of my current novel in plot points thus: Woman gets screwed in divorce. She realizes someone is following her. A gypsy curses her, but she blows it off. Her sister and her house are really, really, really strange, but hey, she's an addict, what did she expect?
Sometimes I read books where I wonder if there are any plot points. Everybody seems to just be on the road to getting somewhere, taking a billion pages doing it. I love Robert Jordan, but hey, I skim that crazy dead man. Once the characters arrive, a bad novelist does nothing but sit there and describe the different setting, going right back to day two on the road. (All of this road business being either metaphorical or literal, depending upon what you're doing).
So, my point is, a writer needs to make the getting there interesting, but also be aware of the concept of plot point so that it’s worth the travel. It is worth the time to start thinking in terms of PLOT POINTS.
Gary Wedlund
Wonderful, wonderful insights! I have to search myself on why do I read. I am not a tv watcher I may watch and hour a month....how much of our time do we spend with our writer selves? Is it something to do, is it something that has to be put to paper or drive us nuts, a creative outlet, or are certain people born with the ability to put inner thoughts and various inner selves to paper? How many are out there that the mechanics of writing put them off. This discussion should help, Gary.
Goodreads Sci-Fi/Fantasy Au...
unread topics | mark unread
